erudio student loans

[mrsbug]

Hi, I have an old student loan from 1998 which I have been deferring since then as I have never earned enough to pay it back (there are some advantages to being poor )

I recently had a letter from a company called erudio student loans saying they have bought my student loan from the government. All very reassuring about how the t and cs of my loan won't change, etc.

Now I've had the regular deferral letter from them and it's much more detailed than before. They want my bank details which I'm not really happy to give, and they say my details will be checked with a credit reference agency, which I don't think they used to do - my loan has never shown on my credit file.

Has anyone else had this? Do I have to give them this info?

I've been reading this thread for a few days as I've been trying to decide what to do about the ongoing Erudio saga.

I called them again today and asked them how they had managed to increase my monthly payments (apparently this is because of interest but it stayed the same throughout the 14 years it's been with the SLC) and that the new payment figure is generated with the interest added on - so I was not convinced by this but I moved on to my next question..... Why are Erudio going to inform CRAs if I defer my loan when this is a direct contradiction of my original terms and conditions? Cue being put on hold for so long while they "went to find out" that the call suddenly fell silent after spending at least 10 minutes listening to hold music.

I also asked about the fact that this constituted tactics which bullied people into paying because of the threat of CRAs being given our data. Erudio don't seem to have an answer to this. Erudio want to shaft me with £160 a month for 5 years while they can't even confirm what they are playing at in relation to CRAs, deferment and plenty of other questions that we all seem to get no answers to.

I'm sorry, but if you pay a fraction for the debt that I owe, the very least you can do is be transparent instead of threatening and bullying people for more money than what you paid out for the government loan book.

If you ask me, every single one of us on these mortgage style loans needs to get together and take on Erudio. I told them I cancelled my direct debit with them until they can confirm and clarify what they are up to as I don't think they should have access to my account if they can't be transparent. They didn't have anything to say to this. What are they going to do if they entire loan book does the same and says no?

I've read this entire thread tonight. Very interesting. I've never received a Notice of Assignation (if that's what it's called) from Erudio. I don't know if that affects my obligation to repay/defer, but would be interested in others' views. If nothing else I have nothing to state when my deferment ends or when my application must be returned by.

I only received my deferment pack today, having phoned them last week asking where it was. Turns out they sent the original (and presumably the NoA) to the last address I lived in when I was in Uni - in 1998/99! I've moved about half a dozen times since then! I complained that they'd sent my personal information to an incorrect address when I phoned, but have heard nothing back yet.

I also phoned them today to complain that while they've sent me the deferment pack, they haven't sent me the instruction booklet to which it refers. I also complained that their letter advises me to refer to their website but that's not up and running yet (actually it looks like it is now - nothing useful there though).

I told them I had no faith in their ability to correctly administer my loan and the adviser actually sounded sympathetic (subdued even?) and said she understood why I felt like that. Sounds like the call centre workers might be starting to feel the pressure of people moaning already.

So anyway - the useful bit - the first girl I spoke to last week said I could send my deferment application to them by email. The girl I spoke to today confirmed this. The email address is on the covering letter with the deferment pack - [email protected] . She said I could scan my documents or send electronic copies (PDFs etc) and scan the deferment form and email it in.

Based on what I've read here tonight I intend emailing them last month's payslip and a statement that my income won't exceed the threshold in the next 3 months. And also a statement that I do NOT agree to my details being shared with credit ref agencies etc. I think I'll set the email to request a Read Receipt, but either way it'll be hard for them to deny receiving one. The evidence will always be in my Sent Items.

Apologies for the length of the post, but I had a few things to get off my chest.

It's really heartening to see so many people contributing to this thread.

It's very informative hearing about the different and often conflicting responses people are getting from Erudio, and also hugely interesting following erudioed's progress with govt. departments.

All of this sharing of information is making us stronger and better informed in how we as individuals can deal with Erudio. And it's the biggest chink in their armour as they're not used to dealing with 'debtors' working as organised groups.

I sent off my deferment application last week and I think the next notable step will be Erudio's response to that. I didn't provide 'extra' ID information and rejected the change in T&Cs.

Presumably, within 28 days or so, a lot of people on this thread should start getting responses. At that point it will become clear whether Erudio are out to push people into default using underhand tactics regarding the Direct debits and T&C changes. Certainly, we'll get a further insight into their tactics.

I'm looking into the 'official complaint' side of things too while I wait for my response.

I'll update when I get any response or new news and will keep checking in for the latest.

I would also urge people to be wary of revealing home/work phone numbers by accident. If you call the call centre without withholding your number they will store where you called from and match it to your details and then they're free to pester you whenever they want.

Emptycoffers that is a very good point about the phone numbers.
My next steps (which I would encourage as many people as possible to do) are...

1. Write to Errudio complaining about the change to the T&Cs about deferment, especially as they say in the first letter pack "these are your original T&Cs so please sign"
2. Write to the Government BIS department raising concerns about changing of T&Cs, and underhand method it is being done by.
3. Write to own MP as per step 2.

As soon as I receive my deferment forms I will rewrite to all the above, stating any further changes within those documents.

My Hubby is drafting a letter for me but I don't want to come across too aggressively in the first instance. They are asking for my tax return. for copies of the tenancy agreements I have with the tenants in my flat, bank statements and a letter from my husband. the money he earns is not my taxable income so I do not see that what he gives me is anything to do with them.

Checked with hmrc website about NI number. Says the following:

Who uses your National Insurance number?

You will have to give your National Insurance number to:

HM Revenue & Customs
your employer
Department for Work and Pensions (which includes Jobcentre Plus and Pension, Disability and Carers Service), if you claim state benefits
your local council, if you claim Housing Benefit
the Student Loans Company, if you apply for a student loan

So, as Im not applying for a loan Im not sure I should be giving this out. They should already have this information from the SLC if they need it to administer my loan.

That was what I thought. I have letter from my accountant confirming my earnings, that was what was asked for on my deferment form and so that is what I sent. Where and how do I find out what they are entitled to ask for? This situation is really doing my head in. I also didn't take a copy of the deferment form I signed because it was from the SLC and looked the same as all the others I have done. I thought legally, if there had been changes to something like that then they would have to make them absolutely clear to you. I feel like an idiot and I don't now know what I have signed!

I agree Qubit, it suggests that SLC might not have handed everything over, or just those things that Erudio need. I assume a huge data dump and they just dont want to do the legwork going through it all.

Littlemissgreens plan sounds perfect, i actually started drafting mine to BIS (the department for business innovation and skills today). The email address is: [email protected]

On a general note, we have to be very careful about not breaching our agreement right now because i get a sense (although early days) that they are going to be mercenary in what they are legally allowed to do. If we mess up once, they will sight us for a breech...and then they can unleash hell, such as immediately demand full payment, probably in the same reply that they would inform us our deferments have not been authorised. They will then be on much more familiar territory as a debt collector with CCJs and all that stuff coming in to play. If their plan is to turn a deferer into a defaulter, i feel that they could do that very easily, just by not allowing them to set up a direct debit for example, or refusing to sign up to the CRA part (pre1998 loans they say will automatically be passed on to CRAs and 1998 ones being the ones that need permission) by refusing to sign the deferment application. Maybe our pre1998 loans are already on the CRA's sites...maybe our original agreements allowed this i dont know cause i dont have it. The fact that they distinguish in the original welcome packs between pre- and post-1998 CRA information suggests they may have the right to do this. i just dont know. I am mailing the Department of Business Innovation and Skills complaints department email that i list above in the next day or so to seek answers. But we all have to for all our complaints, what ever they are.
But we all need to make sure we do not default and allow them to turn legitimate deferers into defaulters. As soon as that has happened, we could be in deep do-do...and very quickly, like this month if they send out deferment answers.
We can buy time by logging a complaint with erudio and making sure the deferment deadline is extended beyond the 8 weeks they take to respond to a complaint. Hopefully that will give the Dept of B, I & S complaints a time to be assessed...if we all make them. Because after the first default, all terms and conditions no longer apply, and from what i understand, loans will never be written off. By getting us to default, it extends the time they have to collect our full loans, guaranteeing that we will have the debts until death. Maybe this is why erudio told me they are not accepting short settlements for deferers, they must think they can open up the pool of deferers who are currently deferring by getting them to settle in full over the course of our lifetimes. It also implicitly suggests that they think most deferers are illegitimate if they wont accept short settlements, as most or us only have 10 years or less of deferment before it is written off. It seems crazy business sense to not accept part payment for something when most of us want earn the threshold amount to start repaying, so they must have a plan, and my fear is this turning deferers into defaulters and trapping us!

I've been mulling over what to do over the last few day. I initially filled out the form and then found this thread. My biggest concern is the CRA terms and conditions change. Being self employed any impact on my credit rating could, as with most people, really hurt. So i figured I'd give them a call.

First off I can confirm that you can email your deferment with your form scanned and attached along with pdfs or electronic copies of your supporting information. I asked about confirmation of receipt emails but it seems they don't send them out. I will therefore be chasing up regularly to make sure its being looked at. They did confirm that a note will go on my record regarding emailing deferment.

Next the interesting bit. I asked about the change of CRA terms and how i was unhappy about it but didnt want to stop my deferment going through. I was advised that if I sign and return the form, regardless of any letters stating you dont agree to the terms, the act of signing and returning means you are agreeing to the terms and conditions. He said they had been advised that no terms and conditions had been changed and when i asked for clarification, explaining that they certainly seemed to have, he spoke to a manager who explicitly told him that CRAs will only be contacted when an account is in default and NOT in deferment. I asked him to clarify this several times so i could be in no doubt. I explained that it didnt read like that but he reiterated that fact and said there would be no problem with me putting that information in the covering letter/email.

I think my plan now is to send the deferment by email, with a covering email explaining how I was advised the CRA terms and conditions have been explained to me. I am also going to get a credit report so I can check if they do indeed send the information. If they do, I've then got some ammunition against them.

winner3131,
I hope you are correct about the CRA issue because everything they have sent on paper out thus far contradicts that and in fact states that pre1998 loan info will be passed on regardless of consent. It is the post 1998 ones they are asking for permission for. However, the deferment pack makes no distinction between the two and states that by signing your deferment, that "INFORMATION THAT YOU HAVE A DEFERRED LOAN WILL BE REGISTERED WITH CREDIT REFERENCE AGENCIES". I feel it is you who needs to get that in writing first because anything said over the phone is inadmissible if they decided to pull a swifty on you.They would be able to show your signature consenting to this just 5 cms above the statement on the same page. If i had a letter from Erudio stating this, i would then not have an issue with it but without that confirmation in writing before you sign over the right, you have no leg to stand on
I called yesterday about exactly the same thing and didnt get the answer you got. However, if they have had a radical rethink and they will do exactly as you say, then that is one step forward in stopping their seemingly aggressive opening serve!
We need to cover ourselves by having paperwork stating this because the paperwork they have sent says the opposite.

Can anyone tell me what would happen if my deferment process takes too long (for example, due to being in dispute with them about the nature of the process/form) and payments start from my bank account and I subsequently have my deferment approved? Would I be entitled to those payments back? (or would it just reduced my outstanding amount)

The NI number requirement, I think, is a red herring.
It would be essential for those students paying back loans which were 'income contingent' or repayments taken via the tax system - I think all the post '98 loans are like this.
It's entirely irrelevant for mortgage-style loans.

It is useful to have the NI number if you are performing bulk credit checks and want to have definite ID before making any CRA entries - in fact, it may be a condition of the CRAs that a debt collection agency has a minimum number of specified forms of identification BEFORE they are permitted to make entries on a borrower's credit record - possible - but I'm not certain.

It's also very likely that Erudio will be bidding to buy the next tranche of student loans (which are income contingent/PAYE system based) and they may well be planning to use exactly the same 'processing system' that they are rolling out now hence we are being asked for information which is not essential to our loans but would be for future borrowers.

waitingforgoddot - they will only ask you for a letter from your husband/partner, if you have declared that you are receiving an income from this person, and if you have ticked the box saying you have an income from your partner then the letter need only state that the income is less than the threshhold for deferment - although if you have other incomes, you would need to declare an actual amount of income, so that they can see what your total/gross income is.
Even in their own Guide Book they state that they do not need or want to know your partner's income.

Qubit - I think that question was covered by mandakl earlier.

Essentially, deferment can be backdated by up to three months - such as in the circumstances you describe.

I believe any payments taken from your account during this 3 month period are refunded IF deferment is approved.

If you are engaged with an official complaint, for example to the Financial Ombudmans, I believe your account is put 'on hold' until the issue is resolved.

Always worth checking these things against your paperwork/Erudio - if you do find yourself in this position.

So what have people done in relation to sending forms back?

I also have an income and expenditure form to fill out so that I can negotiate an agreed payment but I'm also wary about what this could trigger - though I may just be being paranoid. I could arrange to start paying it back at a reduced rate that I agree with Erudio and this would remain in place for a year. At the end of that year I would have to fill out another form to see if I can increase or keep the payments the same. This way I pay off what I can afford and I avoid the CRA threat if I defer - even though this method means that they have effectively bullied me into paying.

As I said earlier, I would cancel any direct debit to stop them taking money out of your account if they haven't processed your deferment properly. I asked them yesterday if there was a penalty for doing this and they said no. It's your responsibility to pay it so if you have agreed to pay it and then cancel your DD then I assume this is what would get you into trouble. Cancelling a DD when nothing has been agreed in terms of payments etc shouldn't cause you any grief and it's your account you are giving them access to. You wouldn't give anyone access to your account on the off chance of making a payment to them would you? If that's the case I might set up a DD to my next door neighbour in case we ever agree a payment of any sort.

Would be good if someone could bullet list a process of how they've communicated with Erudio regarding deferment etc so we have clear steps to follow which also keep us within legal boundaries.

emptycoffers - thanks for your reply, much appreciated.

a slight interlude.
Most i am sure following another thread on moneysavingexpert.com about this issue with erudio. Well, it turns out Erudio were originally called Honours Student Loans and this is not the first bunch of loans they have purchased. Maybe erudio have changed the way they operate but you will not like the stories from other people from around our loans period who had their loans sold to the original erudio and are beyond the initial period were at before deferments are either verified or turned down (forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=770411).
They actually realise many of our worst fears and go beyond others

Hi folks -

I got a letter from Erudio the other week and this issue has been doing my head in since so i went online and stumbled across this site.

I was on the telephone to Erudio earlier for 45 minutes and i am exhausted mentally. I mean these people are masters at underhandedness and double-talking.

I initially spoke to a woman who was obviously just reading from a script and had no idea what i was talking about... so she passed me on to her supervisor eventually.

At first the supervisor kept insisting that there were no changes to the original terms and conditions and i kept pointing out that the original terms and conditions do not require me to provide them with a direct debit mandate and that the SLC never asked me for a direct debit mandate... after several minutes of this he broke down and said that there had been no changes to the LOAN terms and conditions but the DEFERMENT terms and conditions HAD been changed. I asked him what this meant and he told me that Erudio has changed the deferment criteria. I asked him how this was possible when Erudio is not allowed to change the original terms and conditions and he just repeated that they had changed the DEFERMENT terms and conditions and not the LOAN terms and conditions. I asked him if this was legal and he said that Erudio is a reputable company and operate completely within the law... i replied that even if it was legal it was really underhand and sneaky.

No reply.

I then pointed out that if the original terms and conditions didn't insist on a direct debit mandate but the new terms and conditions do insist on one then regardless of how you try to dress it up there has been a change to the terms and conditions. And this is where it gets interesting. He replied that Erudio is not INSISTING on a direct debit mandate but they "would LIKE it if you set one up" for them. I asked if this meant i was legally obliged to give them a direct debit mandate and he said "no but it is something we would prefer" as it streamlined the process and made things easier for them or something. I pointed out that this is not what the new deferral forms state... the new deferral forms state you MUST have a direct debit mandate and if you don't have one you will be breaching your contract... he confirmed this but wouldn't be drawn on the obvious contradiction.

I then pointed out that there was no way to fill in their deferral forms without implicitly agreeing to the new terms and conditions and again he confirmed this was the case.

He agreed that the new deferral forms DID NOT ACCURATELY REFLECT the actual legal situation with regards to what Erudio is or is not entitled to ask for and said "it's unfortunate that these forms are what we have to work with but i can't think of an alternative" which... wow... just wow. In essence he admitted that the forms are both misleading and legally binding.

He then went on to drop several hints that i would be refused deferral if i didn't have a direct debit mandate even tho he JUST admitted i'm not obliged to have one legally. I called him on this and said that on one hand he was saying that i didn't need to set up a direct debit but on the other hand if i didn't i might be refused deferral... he was noncommittal and refused to confirm or clarify.

I then asked him about sending my details to credit rating firms. Initially he tried to say that there had been no changes to the original terms and conditions regarding this... but when i called him on this he changed tack and said "i don't understand why you would have a problem with this sir... if you are in deferral or you are making your payments you get a little tick next to your name so this is a GOOD thing for your credit rating" which blew my mind obviously. I tried to explain that this was another change to my original terms and conditions but he wouldn't accept that and seemed to think i was mental for finding this objectionable.

And finally i told him that the new deferment forms asked for much more information than i was comfortable giving. I explained that the SLC didn't need any of this information and that most of it was irrelevant to deferment etc. He replied that Erudio needed this information for MY sake to make the process of deferment easier for ME etc.

I told him that i had consulted a solicitor (which i have) and that he had advised me that i shouldn't fill in their deferment forms and that instead i should send the usual proof of income with a covering letter stating that i fully intended to comply with the original terms and conditions and that i wasn't trying to breach my contract but i don't agree to the new terms and conditions.

He seemed to find this novel and amusing and said that i was within my rights to "try this approach" and that it was "worth a punt" as he couldn't see any obvious reasons why this wouldn't work. But he did then imply that not using Erudio's forms might result in my deferral being denied. He said that if i tried this and my deferral was denied then he didn't think i would be held in breach and i could still re-apply for deferral using Erudio's forms but that doing so might delay the process and i would then be required to begin repayments and as i didn't have a direct debit mandate i would be held in breach.

So essentially he admitted that the terms and conditions have been changed (altho they are using technicalities to justify this and i'm not informed enough to argue this) and if you try to get around the changes they will consider you to have breached your contract. Also they won't confirm or clarify anything (such as will i or won't i be held in breach if i refuse to give them a direct debit mandate) because they don't want you to have a clear idea of where you stand legally.

Sorry for the longest rant ever but i felt like this information needed to be out there and i'm really angry.

This is all getting pretty scary. Let's all agree on some sort of action for responding to Erudio.

brilliant account, i wish is it was longer it was so well written. Although discussing different things, your interactions echo those i had. No reliable answers, seeming agreement with surprising things pointed out and no clear idea about anything. I am sure they just want us to breach our agreement and bring the roof down on our heads. We have to immediately complain to the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills complaints department and The Financial Conduct Authority who i understand this very day took over regulation of Erudio. We have to complain now before the deferrals are assessed to be safe. Honours Student Loans, now Erudio, had a horrendous record...they purchased 506,000 debts for £200 per loan a number of years ago, after purchasing them from a group including Nationwide and Deutsch Bank (who were sold them by SLC) but still kept their aggressive approach instead of getting a 200% or 300% settlement for each. They paid much more on average for ours, so be afraid, very afraid!

yes halfpricedebt, lets do it. How do we start.

erudioed - I'm no corporate structures expert but are you sure there's an actual link between Erudio and Thesis/Honour/Link?

I don't know for sure but I wouldn't want to muddy the waters with information overload.... and then I go and add to it

Thesis/Honour bought the previous batch of loans sold by the govt. but my understanding is that Erudio is a 'new' corporate entity created specifically to deal with the new purchase.
I believe Erudio is owned by a giant international debt collector - Arrow Global/CarVal.

Have you found an actual corporate link between Erudio/Arrow and Honour/thesis/Link?
www.arrowglobal.net/news/default.aspx?newsitem=115

I've no doubt that as debt collection agencies, they will all have tried and tested methods which will be very similar - just querying the business relationship.

Interesting request someone made under the Freedom of Information Act here
www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/relationship_and_data_sharing_wi

with regards to loan data held between SLC and Thesis/Honour.

Just discovered people on this site are suggesting a link between Erudio and Link Financial via a company called Wilmington Trust:
www.legalbeagles.info/forums/showthread.php?44879-Arrow-Global-consortium-buys-Student-Loan-debt-of-%A3900m-for-%A3160m

Still, let's be frank, none of us thought we'd be specially selected to deal with the nicey, nice end of the debt collection stick - let's come out fighting!

In the words of Gorman (Aliens) "listen up and listen good, i want this shit run by the numbers"

@erudioed - I'll have a think about what's been said so far and draft up some steps for people to take. Possibly post them on here later today?

First thing I would say is cancel your DD if there is one sitting on your account while you are trying to get confirmation about the small print or Erudio's t&cs.

There's always the online petition route and social media.

Love the Aliens quote emptycoffers! :D

click this: fca-consumer-credit-interim.force.com/CS_RegisterSearchPageNew
type in erudio.
Click the red names part
You see previous name: Honours Trustee 2 Limited

I found this on another site (www.studentloans9.com/student-loans-company/honours-student-loans-company.html):
Honours Student Loans Company is a federal government financial institution. This monetary institution is also known as HSL and it also manages the organization as well as the management of Student Loans for every customers of Honours Trustee Limited, which is also known as HTL. Unless the student has been notified that one or more of his/her student loans have been transferred to HTL, the student loans are continued to be managed by the Student Loans Company (SLC) and not by the Honours Student Loans (HSL).

Although the 2 in the name is missing, i am pretty sure it is the same company.